Seite - 234 - in The Power of Urban Water - Studies in premodern urbanism

234 UlrichMüller spacenonetheless displays a relevant internal differentiation, andnot only through the actual logistical featuresof theport (landbridges,storage,market).Evenifweknewtheprecisedetails and,most importantly, the functions of thewaterfront building developments along thewest- east route, we would still be permitted to assume that this development included functional zones that correspondedwith the activities of the port. One fact remains fundamental to our understandingof theemporiumhere,which is that themarketplace,withall of its various func- tions,wasnot separated from theplatforms. Haithabu as an emporium is very strongly focused on supra-regional connectivity. The de- velopmentof theportover 200years reflectsboth thedifferent intensitiesof these relationships and the fact that itwas always ahub inmaritimenetworks. Schleswig is referred to as a civitas in thewritten sources.25 Set opposite Haithabu on the northern side of the Schlei, the city was the southernmost centre of the Danish kingdom be- tween the second half of the 11th century and the mid- to late 12th century.26 Schleswig was located in thenorth-western sectionof the innermostSchlei, onahilltop formedbyPleistocene deposits andwith amaximumheight of 8m. Today, the old city covers approximately 16ha. Prior to the anthropogenic sedimentationof thewest-lyingKönigswiesen, the location’s histori- cal topographywas that of a pouch-shapedpeninsulawith a surface area of about 10ha. Sys- tematic archaeological research into Schleswig was initiated at the beginning of the 1970s, whereby the excavation of the historical waterfront areas accounted for the largest excavated surface area. These excavations were the subject of a new analysis by Felix Rösch in 2018.27 Now, as before, there remains controversy as to when and how the ‘move’ fromHaithabu to Schleswig happened andwhich areas of the peninsula were concretely developed during the 11th century (Fig.4.1). On the grounds of a new analysis of the written sources, the historian Christian Radkte supports the thesis that Schleswig already existed in the first half of the 11th century.28 The earliest archaeologically observable development is the creation of at least sixdistinctplotsof landintheperiodaround1070.Thismaybeconsideredthemostchronologi- callymeaningfulevidence for the initial settlementof thepeninsula. Inanycase, thesettlement areasalong theSchleiweresystematicallydeveloped(Fig.4.2).Theplotsestablishedduring the 1070swere about 6 to 10mwide, and it is posited that they extended some 15 to 25m to the north. In the beginning, these plots of landwere probably alreadydividedbyditches and fen- ces, and lay about 4 to 5m from the shoreline. Plot 2 is exceptional, with awidth of approxi- mately20mandasignificantlydifferentorientationto theothers.From1076on, the first funda- mental changes tookplace. Thus, someof the landplotswere extended in the directionof the Schlei’s shoreline, and to theeast a road runningparallel to the shorewas constructed.On the one hand, these buildingmeasures opened up access for all of the plots along the shoreline, but on the other hand, they restricted any further extension in the direction of the Schlei. The road, with its west-east route, created a corridor for interaction that not only opened up the area to thewaterfront, but also connected the plots of land to one another. If we assume that the plots were individuallymanaged, from this point on the roadwould create, as it were, a ‘public space’. It is reasonable toagreewithRöschwhenheassumes that thisdevelopmentwas probably the result of a royal initiative, or at least required royalpermission.At the same time, some individual initiatives can be observed. For example, the construction of the road pro- gressed in twodirections, andamisalignment canbe seenat the juncture.Oneengagingques- tion that remains as yet unanswered iswhether this road continuedwestwards, connecting to anaccess road in thedirectionof theSchlei. 25 Radtke 2017b. 26 On the archaeology and history of Schleswig, seemost recentlyMüller 2016, 346–350 and Rösch 2018, 35–38 with further details. 27 Rösch 2018. The following explanations arebasedonChapter 9. 28 Radtke 2017a.